garyshort.org

Looks pretty naff to be honest.

:0

At least mine updates.

And you might want to apply a style at some point.

And mostly cloudy does not mean partly cloudy

In fact, you might as well lick your finger and stick it out the windae.

Now that's not very nice is it.

Aye, but then again, yer maw.

But it's no' a debate; eh'm right, you're wrang.

And BTW; Python? :¬(

Says who?

At least my language has a switch statement. I mean there's only yours and Perl that doesn't.
*sticks tongue into bottom lip*
nuh nuh nuh

There's more than one definition of "well-designed", boyo.

You would think so, wouldn't you.

This from the SmallTalk advocate; the programming language for idiot-savants.

"This room is green"

You forgot the idiot part, which is why there are so few of you; plenty idiots, only a few IS'

Yeah, yeah, it's like we, the amoeba, trying to grasp the world of humans, blah blah blah.

I think it's a bit like COBOL. Nice in it's day, but companies who have a system are fevourishly looking around to get it replaced before all of the IS programmers die off.

When he starts to realise that SmallTalk is a dying language he'll be kacking les pants.

Sure most modern high level languages take elements from ST, but they take elements from elsewhere too. It's not the be-all and end-all.

Face it, it's the same four programmers going around the world demanding exorbitant amounts of moulah supporting system that could quite easily be ported to more widely used languages. Then they would have all the help in the world, rather than some backwater out-of-the-way BBS that nobody in their right mind would want to visit.

Cincom is only still around because it's the only real player in the ST world that's still pushing it.
Sure IBM is about the only company in the Smalltalk world which could afford to mount a Big Buzz push, but they've got other priorities at the moment.

I'm not sure I particularly want to see the big IT project managers
buzzing around about Smalltalk again. Remember, that happened once already
(in the early '90s), and it definitely had its bad points along with the
good. All too many projects were run in the "old way": analysts analyze,
architects architect, the database drives the project, and a small army of
programmers code to spec. This really isn't the way to go with Smalltalk.
In my experience, which I'll admit isn't vast, Smalltalk/O-O projects do
best when the teams are small, the iterations are fast, and everyone has a
hand in the design discussions - yes, it can be done in a large IT
environment, but it takes very open minded management. The existence of
spelled-out methodologies like XP helps a lot, but ultimately I don't think
trying to recapture the big projects is the way to go. All too often, I've
seen Smalltalk take the blame for the failure of management to accept that
they're dealing with a different animal than they're used to.

Hey, whats wrong with switch statements anyway? Yeh Yeh, they compile back to native "if" logic anyway, but who the hell wants to use 10 nested ifs or elseifs when a case statements makes the logic immediately apparent (the fact they compile back to ifs should mean no loss in performance).

Blimey, even actionscript is advanced enough to have switch statements!?!?!?! ;-)

[quote]
... Cincom, one of the oldest tech companies on the planet, and the one with the longest serving CEO - that’s real stability. If there’s any language that’s on it’s way out it’s C++; who’d choose to learn it now that C# is out, and the same fate awaits C# too when the next thing that MS wants to spend it’s marketing dollars on comes along.
[/quote]

Which is why MS have 90% of the market. They move with the times.